DiscoverBrowse CategoriesHow it worksMethodologyFor developers
Whop
Whop · Lifestyle

We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.

Nothing unfair corroborated · unauditedConfidence: High3 signal sources502 reviews scannedNot human-reviewedas of 2026-10-05
 Which version this describes

This analysis describes version 5.26.1 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.

The store currently lists version 5.26.1, updated 2026-09-30.

What the analysis found

Each finding shows what agreed and how strongly. Automated analysis

One source only — shown, not confirmed 2

A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.

Reported by users: Hard to cancel
One source onlyShown, not confirmed — the only source is user reviews.view evidence
Cancelling the subscription is blocked, hidden, multi-step, or simply does not take effect.
What we saw: Hard to cancel: raised by 6 distinct reviewers (1.2% of 502 reviews scanned)
Reported by users: Reports of unexpected charges
One source onlyShown, not confirmed — the only source is user reviews.view evidence
A large number of reviewers report being charged when they did not expect it — including being charged after cancelling during a free trial, or when a trial turned into a paid plan without warning. We cannot see anyone's billing, so this is published as an attributed user report: what reviewers say, and how many of them said it.
What we saw: Surprise charges: raised by 29 distinct reviewers (5.8% of 502 reviews scanned)

What reviewers said

Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.

Hard to cancel

Charged — I do not like that I am being charged for something I didn’t want I can’t cancel

1★ · App Store · 2025-10-16

Worst App ever — I tried canceling a membership on their website and it kept asking me to leave a reason. I don’t want to nor do I need to leave a reason why I don’t want to pay for something. The online portal doesn’t allow you to type…

1★ · App Store · 2025-10-10

Cancellation — Next to IMPOSSIBLE to cancel!!!!!

1★ · App Store · 2025-08-08

Reports of unexpected charges

Buyer Beware: You can pay and receive nothing. — I don't usually leave one-star reviews, but I think other potential buyers should understand the risk. In my experience, this platform did not protect me as a buyer. I spent 130 dollars on…

1★ · App Store · 2026-09-06

Scam — WAGERIQ scammed me and took my money they never answered. Please don’t fall for it. I tried to talk with customer support but they never answered.

1★ · App Store · 2026-08-21

Scammer keep charging your Apple Pay — This app is terrible and they keep charging you even after canceled

1★ · App Store · 2026-07-23

How the automated analysis works

Automated, corroborated, and never human-reviewed without a person.

This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.

No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.

There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.

Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.

 Not yet human-reviewed

Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.

Hands-on inspections are not yet open.

 How this page was produced
Analyzed 2026-10-05 Version analyzed: 5.26.13 independent signals502 reviews scannedConfidence: HighNot human-reviewedVocabulary v1.13Methodology v1.3
Signals run: user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure. Not yet checked: SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text and the app manifest.